Recent scholarship, including the studies of Mark Edwards, Panayiotis
Tzamalikos, and Dylan Burns, has seriously qualified the intellectual
relationship between Plotinus and Origen. Whereas Origen was once
comfortably termed a “Platonist,” such an epithet has become
increasingly difficult to ascribe to the Alexandrian theologian in light
of his idiosyncratic reworking of ideas pertaining to ontology,
eschatology, and hermeneutics. Still, the conceptualization of Plotinus
and Origen as somehow occupying the same intellectual terrain is not
without historical precedent. Indeed, this paper argues that we would
do well to revisit an early stage of early modern theological inquiry to
understand fully how and why Plotinus and Origen have often been
uniquely compared. Specifically, this paper addresses the so-called
Cambridge Platonist Henry More (1614-1687), whose theology was both
overtly indebted to Plotinus and characterized by contemporaries as
suffering from the undue influence of “Origenism.” In returning to some
important points first adumbrated by D.W. Dockrill in the pages of Studia Patristica,
this paper develops a sustained consideration of More’s theology and
maintains that a careful consideration of More’s speculative enterprise
stands to provide measureable insight into the historical comparison of
Plotinus and Origen in the patristic scholarship of the last three
centuries.
No comments:
Post a Comment